Page 2 of 2
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 2:57 pm
by TI-994A
Here's another cross-platform approach that handles the
DisableGadget() and
HideGadget() functions. Instead of making separate calls to enable/disable or show/hide the gadgets, only single calls are required to toggle their states. It makes use of the gadget-data integer on a bitwise level, allowing more than one flag to be set for each gadget:
Code: Select all
EnableExplicit
#bitShow = 0
#bitEnable = 1
Define gadgetData, wFlags, appQuit, vStat.s, eStat.s
Macro EnableGadget(gadgetNo)
gadgetData = GetGadgetData(gadgetNo)
gadgetData!(1<<#bitEnable)
DisableGadget(gadgetNo,
(gadgetData&(1<<#bitEnable))>>#bitEnable)
SetGadgetData(gadgetNo, gadgetData)
EndMacro
Macro ShowGadget(gadgetNo)
gadgetData = GetGadgetData(gadgetNo)
gadgetData!(1<<#bitShow)
HideGadget(gadgetNo,
(gadgetData&(1<<#bitShow))>>#bitShow)
SetGadgetData(gadgetNo, gadgetData)
EndMacro
Macro GadgetEnabled(gadgetNo)
-(((GetGadgetData(gadgetNo)&(1<<#bitEnable))>>#bitEnable) - 1)
EndMacro
Macro GadgetVisible(gadgetNo)
-(((GetGadgetData(gadgetNo)&(1<<#bitShow))>>#bitShow) - 1)
EndMacro
vStat = "Visible" : eStat = "Enabled"
wFlags = #PB_Window_SystemMenu | #PB_Window_ScreenCentered
OpenWindow(0, 50, 50, 220, 100, "Gadget States", wFlags)
ButtonGadget(0, 15, 10, 120, 25, "ENABLE/DISABLE -->")
ButtonGadget(1, 15, 40, 120, 25, "SHOW/HIDE -->")
ButtonGadget(2, 150, 10, 50, 55, "TEST")
TextGadget(3, 15, 75, 200, 20, "Test Button Status: Visible && Enabled")
Repeat
Select WaitWindowEvent()
Case #PB_Event_CloseWindow
appQuit = 1
Case #PB_Event_Gadget
If EventGadget() < 2
Select EventGadget()
Case 0
EnableGadget(2)
eStat = StringField("Disabled Enabled",
GadgetEnabled(2) + 1, " ")
Case 1
ShowGadget(2)
vStat = StringField("Hidden Visible",
GadgetVisible(2) + 1, " ")
EndSelect
SetGadgetText(3, "Test Button Status: " +
vStat + " && " + eStat)
EndIf
EndSelect
Until appQuit = 1
It essentially expands the single gadget-data integer into its multiple bits.
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:43 pm
by Josh
Can't understand the discussion here. Shardik shows
here a perfect solution. It's clear, short, cross-platform, probably the fastest and will not make problems (can only speak from window, but I think API's in MacOS and Linux will work similar).
All other suggestions here are (sorry) bullsh.... and will bring only problems.
Apart from this, it's a shame that PB don't support such simple and essential commands native.
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 6:17 pm
by TI-994A
Josh wrote:Can't understand the discussion here. Shardik shows here a perfect solution. It's clear, short, cross-platform, probably the fastest and will not make problems (can only speak from window, but I think API's in MacOS and Linux will work similar).
All other suggestions here are (sorry) bullsh.... and will bring only problems.
With all due respect to Shardik, I can't understand your blatant contempt for the other suggestions. This is, after all, a programming forum, and solution or not, every contribution has its own value.
In any case, if you had bothered to see his edit history, you'd have realised that Shardik's full cross-platform solution was completed only after most of the other suggestions had been posted.
I don't mean to offend anyone, but I simply feel that such comments are not polite.
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 6:40 pm
by Josh
TI-994A wrote:In any case, if you had bothered to see his edit history, you'd have realised that Shardik's full cross-platform solution was completed only after most of the other suggestions had been posted.
As far as I know, the first code from Shardik included a Api solution for Window and Linux.
Last edited by Shardik on 31 Jul 2013 18:21, edited 4 times in total.
TI-994A wrote:This is, after all, a programming forum, and solution or not, every contribution has its own value.
You are right, everybody who wants to catch problems, should use one of the other solutions. The safest way to get problems is to change the status from the gadget.
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 6:52 pm
by TI-994A
Josh wrote:You are right, everybody who wants to catch problems, should use one of the other solutions. The safest way to get problems is to change the status from the gadget.
Still too much cynicism Josh;
not enough reading.
How does my solution change the gadget status?
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 7:15 pm
by Josh
TI-994A wrote:Still too much cynicism Josh;
not enough reading.
How does my solution change the gadget status?
Who says, that I was speaking about your code? I sayed "The safest way to get problems is to change the status from the gadget."
Not enough reading?
But I can confirm, you have chosen the second safest way to get problems
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 7:25 pm
by TI-994A
Josh wrote:...everybody who wants to catch problems, should use one of the other solutions.
Josh wrote:Who says, that I was speaking about your code?
Mine was not
one of the other solutions?
Josh wrote:But I can confirm, you have chosen the second safest way to get problems
You're making less and less sense with each post.
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 7:29 pm
by RASHAD
No code is safe unless the users are sure that there is no bugs
Are PB safe?
The answer is no
Are MS Windows is safe ?
The answer is no
Keep saying safe and not safe and you are away from being creative
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:21 pm
by Shardik
TI-994A wrote:In any case, if you had bothered to see his edit history, you'd have realised that Shardik's full cross-platform solution was completed only after most of the other suggestions had been posted.
Josh wrote:As far as I know, the first code from Shardik included a Api solution for Window and Linux.
To clarify this: my first posting at 31 Jul 2013 10:15 was a pure Windows API solution because I thought that the probability was high that the original poster would look for a Windows solution. But directly after posting I tried a Linux API solution and while editing my first posting to add the Linux API part and submitting it, I saw that Rashad had just posted his first example code needing no API at all and so being cross-platform. I remarked in my first edit that I currently wouldn't have the opportunity for a Mac solution because I don't have a Mac at work to try. In the evening at home on my iMac I tested the Mac API part and added it to my posting...
Of course I always studied the newly posted code examples but instead of responding to them I decided to edit again my first posting and put in the remark that my API solution won't have the disadvantages of the following non-API code examples.
I understand fully the wish to get around the use of API functions whenever possible. But I have the same oppinion as Josh that the disadvantage of the current non-API solutions in having to change a gadget's state speak against their use.
Furthermore for some time I have tried to collect all cross-platform API solutions in
this posting in the hope that my cross-platform examples save some time for the devs if they decide to implement them natively in PureBasic. And indeed some of my cross-platform functions have already actually been implemented in PureBasic...
Re: Check gadget enable/disable status
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 12:34 am
by TI-994A
Shardik wrote:I understand fully the wish to get around the use of API functions whenever possible. But I have the same oppinion as Josh that the disadvantage of the current non-API solutions in having to change a gadget's state speak against their use.
Hello Shardik. I hope you don't think that I was disparaging your solution. And I hope you don't share Josh's impolite sentiments either. Because this is not an argument of which is the better solution, but simply one of common courtesy, which Josh clearly lacks. And when push came to shove, he couldn't even stand by his statements.
Hands down, yours is clearly the de facto solution here.